Dozens of Somali asylum seekers who were camping outside a detention centre in Ter Apel in the northeastern Netherlands have packed up their tents and ended their protest. A local council spokesperson has confirmed the news.

The refugees have agreed to a compromise offered by the Immigration and Naturalisation Department. They will be allowed to apply afresh for asylum and will be allowed to stay in the country while their cases are considered.

They were protesting because they were due to be deported but claimed Somalia was too dangerous for them to go back. Many of the failed asylum seekers claim not to have the necessary documents to return.

The IND disputes this, saying that repatriation would be possible if the Somalis co-operated in the process. The question of whether or not they can return to Somalia will be answered when their new requests for asylum are considered, according to the IND.

Earlier today, local Mayor Leontien Kompier announced it was “not desirable on humanitarian grounds” that the Somalis should stay in their tents in the present weather conditions.

Police detained a woman in the Brussels borough of Schaarbeek on Tuesday because she was wearing a niqab. The garment is a full veil sometimes worn by Muslim women that only leaves the eyes uncovered. It is banned in Belgium.

The incident arose when the police attempted to check the woman's identity. Police officer Roland Thiébault :"Her husband refused to let us carry out an identity check invoking the woman's human rights. The couple became more and more aggressive and then a bystander intervened. This person too created a serious disturbance on the public highway. The three people were then taken to the police station to check the woman's identity and draw up a police report. There was a violation of the ban on wearing the burqa. Resistance was offered to police officers. There was slander and threats were issued at the police."

Belgium banned the burqa in public because it prevents the identification of the wearer. The woman now risks a 50 euro fine. The two men too face a prosecution.

This account seems to play down the severity of the incident. The DHNET report describes the same incident as a "riot" and contains more interesting detail.

A request [that the woman should unveil] that the woman's husband could not tolerate. Refusing to accept that his wife should submit to the orders of the police, the man started to yell, attracting a crowd.

It was then that another individual, a certain Bernard, incited the crowd to riot, shouting that it was necessary to smash everything and protect "the community".

Faced with police of Moroccan origin, this same man produced a series of insults, in particular describing them as "traitors". The police had to use pepper-spray to disperse those involved.

Not spending so much time on the blog recently, I've had more time to do research. Some of this has involved ploughing through old newspaper archives. One of the topics that interested me was the origins of the term 'Islamophobia'.

Although in everyday use now, the term seems to have been unknown prior to the 1990s. Before 1997, a search of an extensive newspaper archive turns up only 7 uses of it, 5 of them in the Guardian, one in the Observer and one in the Independent. The usual suspects, then.

The earliest use of the term was in a letter published in the Guardian on September 27, 1994. This letter was written in response to a Suzanne Moore article titled 'A lesson in mish-mash morality', which had been published on September 22, 1994.

Here are some excerpts from the article.

Ninety-five per cent of schools inspected last year were not holding Christian assemblies. So what has replaced them? It is not that Onward Christian Soldiers has been replaced by the Black Mass - that would be far too definite - but most kids are now subject to the vague moral mish-mash propagated in the name of multiculturalism.

In practice, faith has become a pick'n'mix affair and all religions are presented as equally valid. Songs which offend no one are sung. My daughter used to sing We All Live In A Yellow Submarine and Rod Stewart's Sailing in her assemblies. My three-year-old is convinced we are Muslims because she has 'done' Ramadan at nursery and thinks we should be doing it at home.

...The nativity play at her old school where many of the kids were Muslims was a spectacle to behold. We were celebrating the birth of a very special baby. No names, no pack drill. No mention of why this baby was special. A prophet was in there, somewhere. Obviously.

...In private few of us let Jehovah's Witnesses into our homes because we think they are nutters. Not all religions are the same, not all of them are tolerant. People kill each other over these beliefs. Let's not pretend that Islam is a cosy little belief system in the multiple choice approach to world religion. Let's talk about Islam as it is lived if you are a 12-old-girl or a gay man, for instance. The blanding out of cultural difference into a range of equal opportunity festivals doesn't fool anyone any of the time. Those children brought up in religious homes will feel secure in their beliefs anyway, those who are not will cobble something together like the rest of us. For while multiculturalism recognises culture only as some kind of ethnic property, it cannot recognise the culture that produced it.

This produced the following letter:

If Suzanne Moore had written 'All religions are not the same. People kill each other over these beliefs. Let's not pretend that Judaism is a cosy little belief system . . . ' there would have been an immediate, and wholly justified, outcry from the Jewish community. Antisemitism, though regrettably far from dead, is at least no longer acceptable in Britain.

But in fact she wrote it of Islam. And Islamophobia is alive and well. Prejudiced talk about Muslims and Islam is widespread, not just from the far right but also from mainstream politicians and commentators of both right and left, including secular liberals such as Ms Moore.

Probably not even apologists would claim that all Muslims live up to the high ideals of Islam, any more than all Jews live up to those of Judaism; but that does not make it any more acceptable to speak of Islam in Ms Moore's undifferentiated and hostile manner.

She wants her children to know more about Christianity. We wish someone had taught her more about Islam before she added her voice to the chorus of Islamophobes in the West.

It may be too much to ask secular liberals to value religion, but let's at least have a bit more tolerance all round.

Saba Risaluddin.

Calamus Foundation.

Richard Stone.

Maimonides Foundation.

After this, the term is not used again until April 1, 1996. It then appears in a Guardian article titled "Muslim leader says Zionists orchestrating 'Islamophobia'" reporting a speech given by the leader of the "Muslim Parliament". Ironically, the Muslim complains about 'Islamophobia' while re-affirming his support for jihad and the murder of Salman Rushdie! Here is the article in full.

A WAVE of 'Islamophobia' orchestrated by Zionists and supported by the Government is sweeping across Britain because of Palestinian terrorism in Israel, the leader of the Muslim parliament claimed yesterday.

Dr Kalim Siddiqui told the 11th session of the parliament in London that he had written to John Major denying British Muslim involvement in the funding of the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas.He also insisted that Muslims in Britain would continue their fight for Islam in the form of a jihad, or holy war, across the world.

'This campaign of demonising Islam and Muslims in Britain was of the same proportions as the one that was unleashed in the United States in the wake of the bombing of Oklahoma,' said Dr Siddiqui.

'The campaign here followed no bombs in this country, but three bombs in Palestine that shook the Zionist entity. Clearly, the powerful Zionist lobby saw the bombs in Palestine as an opportunity to demonise Muslims in Britain.'

He complained that the Government 'obliged by releasing MI5 dogs at our heels'.

Dr Siddiqui said he felt obliged to write to Mr Major to spell out the role of Muslims in Britain.

'The point I have made absolutely clear to the British Prime Minister is that as Muslims, jihad is an obligation on us. We will support jihad in all parts of the world wherever there is oppression and injustice.'

He also re-emphasised the parliament's support for the seven-year fatwa on Salman Rushdie because of his novel The Satanic Verses.

'We must not take up a defensive position on the fatwa, describing it as merely a 'religious decree'. The fatwa was, and remains, an order that must be carried out as and when it becomes possible to do so,' Dr Siddiqui told the conference.

1996 is the take-off year for the term 'Islamophobia'. A few months later it is used again by the Runnymede Trust.

Distorted attitudes towards Britain's Muslims, particularly in the media, are to be challenged by the first-ever investigation into "Islamophobia".

A Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia, to be launched on Monday by the Runnymede Trust, the independent think-tank on race relations, is the first comprehensive attempt to address the concerns of the 1 million-plus Muslims living in Britain.

Source: The Independent, July 20, 1996

Following this commission and the various reports about it in the press, the term "Islamophobia" was launched on its sinister and successful career. It became common currency in Britain. Although used occasionally in North America, it doesn't seem to have taken root there until 2001, not in response to the September 11 attacks as you might expect, but actually even before that.

It looks very much as though the modern use of this term originated in Britain then spread around the world. If we are looking to assign individual responsibility for its creation, the guilty party seems to be Richard Stone. He was one of the authors of the letter written in 1994, which was the first recorded use of the term I can find in the British press, and he was also a member of the Runnymede Trust's Commission on Islamophobia, which promoted widespread use of the term two years later.

Here is some biographical information about Richard Stone I have found in various places.

Dr Richard Stone was on the panel of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry (1997-99) as adviser to Sir William Macpherson. He was also on the panel of the 2003-04 David Bennett Inquiry into the death of a black patient during restraint in the medium secure psychiatry unit in Norwich.

He is President of the Jewish Council for Racial Equality and vice-chair of the Runnymede Trust.
Founder and co-chair of Alif-Aleph UK (British Muslims and British Jews), Dr Stone is also on the Council and Board of Liberty. He is a member of the Home Office’s Working Groups on Tackling Extremism Together, and chairs the recently re-convened Commission on British Muslims & Islamophobia, originally set up by the Runnymede Trust in 1995.

Source

Richard Stone is a stalwart
of race relations and anti-racism
work – using his expertise and
considerable energy to bring
people together across boundaries
and to connect activism to policy.
as Vice-Chair of Runnymede,
Richard was a leading figure in our
Commission on anti-Semitism,
and on Islamophobia and British
Muslims. His input to these
commissions was always passionate
and he played a considerable
role in ensuring that Runnymede
remained connected to grass
roots organizations and that
hitherto ignored discrimination
against Muslims was given due
attention. Richard was also a
member of the advisory panel to
the Macpherson Inquiry into the
murder of Stephen Lawrence and
used his expertise to also bring
light to discrimination in the mental
health system through the inquiry
he led into the treatment of Rocky
Bennett. Fittingly, he made a major
contribution to Runnymede’s
focus in 2009 on the progress
made since the publication of the
Macpherson report, conducting
his own personal inquiry alongside
it in order to find solutions to the
persistent inequalities. Richard plans
to step back from the number of
activities to enjoy a well-deserved
retirement, though knowing
Richard his ‘retirement’ is unlikely
to be a quiet one.

Dr Richard Stone, who is a Patron of the Woolf Institute, was on the panels of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry, and of the 2003/04 David Bennett Inquiry into the death of a Black patient in a medium secure psychiatric hospital in Norwich. He was previously senior partner in a five-doctor group practice in Notting Hill and Bayswater, Central London. Vice-chair of the Runnymede Trust he spent 6 years on its Islamophobia Commission, from 2000 to ’04 as chair. He is President of the Jewish Council for Racial Equality, and founder and co-chair of Alif-Aleph UK, a group of British Muslims & British Jews.

In 2008 he generously donated £1 million to the Woolf Institute to help establish the Centre for the Study of Muslim-Jewish Relations and since this interview he has in 2010 been awarded an OBE for his public and voluntary service.

Note that he founded the Maimonedes Trust. Maimonedes was a medieval Jewish philosopher who grew up in Muslim-controlled Spain. Multicultists love to quote him as an example of successful convivencia. The truth is that he and his people were brutally persecuted by the Muslims. He himself was forced to flee Spain and possibly even go through the motions of converting to Islam to escape being murdered. He said this of the Arabs, referring to them as 'Ishmael' and to the Jews as 'Israel':

“You know, my brethren, that on account of our sins God has cast us into the midst of this people, the nation of Ishmael, who persecute us severely, and who devise ways to harm us and to debase us… No nation has ever done more harm to Israel. None has matched it in debasing and humiliating us. None has been able to reduce us as they have… We have borne their imposed degradation, their lies, and absurdities, which are beyond human power to bear.”

Interview with Richard Stone below. It's rare to such a perfect example of dhimmitude. He thinks Jews and Muslims need to make common cause against European 'fascists' and wants to recreate "Golden Age Spain" (sic) in Britain.

French UMP (the mainstream right-wing party in France, Sarkozy's party) politician Valerie Boyer has been threatened with rape and murder because it was she who introduced the law that would criminalise denial of the Armenian genocide in France. Members of her family have also been threatened. Note that she represents a district in Marseilles, one of the most heavily Muslim-colonised areas in France. She has already had her website hacked by Turkish Mohammedans who have also promised to hack the website of every politician in France!

The websites of the French Senate a National Assembly lawmaker who introduced a bill that would outlaw the denial of the 1915 Turkish ‘genocide’ of Armenians have been attacked by Turkish hackers.
By Tony Todd (text)

Turkish hackers have launched revenge attacks against the French government after the country’s lower house of parliament approved a bill that would outlaw the denial of the 1915 massacre of Armenians in Turkey as a crime of genocide.

The website of the Senate, France’s upper house of parliament which will have to approve the bill before it can become law, was down for two days over the Christmas weekend.

On the evening of December 24, the site showed a black screen signed by Iskorpit, an infamous Turkish hacker who claims to have hijacked some half a million websites during his "career."

A source at the Senate said the site came under a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack, in which thousands of hijacked computers bombard a website with demands for information, swamping it and effectively shutting it down.

On the same day the website of Valérie Boyer, parliamentarian from the ruling UMP party in the lower National Assembly and primary sponsor of the “genocide bill”, was hijacked, this time showing a black screen with a Turkish flag.

Messages in Turkish and English called the National Assembly’s approval of the genocide bill “pathetic and pitiful” and accused France of committing a genocide in Algeria.

The message was signed by a group calling itself “GrayHatz”, which according to French news site Nouvelobs.com includes members of “Akincilar”, the group that launched the attacks on satirical weekly newspaper Charlie Hebdo after it published an edition “guest-edited by the Prophet Mohammed” titled “Charia Hebdo” last November.

Charlie Hebdo’s offices were also firebombed on the day the controversial issue went to press, although one purported member of Akincilar calling himself “Ekber” told Sunday newspaper Journal du Dimanche that the cyber group had nothing to do with the firebombing.

Immediately after the dual Christmas Eve attacks, Akincilar announced its intention to “hack the websites of every single French lawmaker”, nouvelobs.com reported, quoting one of its members saying the group would publish a list of all its attacks made in France with their GrayHatz “friends”.

On Tuesday, blogger Guillaume Perrier , writing in the left-leaning French daily Le Monde, accused the Turkish government of failing to investigate Akincilar for its criminal activities.

“These hackers are acting with impunity in Turkey,” said the blogger. “Not one of them was questioned after attacking Charlie Hebdo’s site, or for their many attacks on other sites.”

“If these people had targeted [Turkish Prime Minister] Recep Erdogan’s site, they would already have been locked up and would be facing terrorism charges.”

Meanwhile, Valerie Boyer's site remained down on Tuesday as she told reporters that she was filing a criminal complaint for harassment. On Monday, she told BFM radio that she had also received “threats of death, of rape, of destruction of property and of physical assault” and that her parents and children had also been threatened.

As for the Senate's website, it was quickly restored and went back on line.

Anders Behring Breivik, the right-wing extremist behind the July 22nd massacre of 77 people, is in the process of writing a book from his prison cell, one of his lawyers has said.

The 32-year-old confessed killer wants to explain why he plans to keep fighting against the multiculturalism he despises, lawyer Vibeke Hein Bæra told radio news show P4 Nyhetene.

“He’s writing about why he wants to continue his battle,” she said.

“It’s not yet known if he wants to call it a continuation of his manifesto or a book.”

This week saw the lifting of restrictions on Breivik, giving him access to the news media for the first time since his arrest.

“He has looked forward to orienting himself in what’s happeing in society. At the same time, his main focus for now is the text he’s writing,” said Hein Bæra.

Norwegian publishers told newspaper Aftenposten that Breivik would likely be able to find a company willing to put out his work.

“A publishing company is not meant to function as a censorship authority and none of the author’s opinions have anything to do with the publisher,” said Anders Heger from publisher Cappelen Damm.

“At the same time, Norwegian publishers don’t have a duty to publish. Personally, I’d have no hesitation in rejecting this, since I don’t see any reason to give him the opportunity of earning money from those awful events.”

A psychiatric report submitted to prosecutors concluded that Breivik suffers from paranoid schizophrenia. He is expected to be sentenced to closed psychiatric care after his trial, which begins in April 2012.

This is an advertising campaign being run in Austria by the ruling Socialist party. It shows a star symbolising Christmas, the Mohammedan crescent and star from the Turkish flag and a rose, emblem of the Socialist party.

Europeans are to have nothing left, no shred of their cultural heritage that is to be truly their own. Mohammedanism is to be forced down their throats at every juncture.

The Austrian Freedom Party called the campaign "cynical and hypocritical" in view of the fact that Christmas songs were not to be sung in schools in the presence of Muslim children.

United Ummah demonstrating outside the US embassy in London on 2 December

An Islamic extremist group is flouting a Home Office ban by reconstituting itself under another name.

Members of Muslims Against Crusades (MAC), which expressed hostility towards British servicemen by publicly burning giant poppies, are now operating under the name United Ummah (a reference to the global Islamic community).

They launched a YouTube channel and hosted a demonstration at the American embassy in London within a month of MAC being proscribed in November.

One video on the YouTube channel praises Anwar al-Awlaki, an Al-Qaeda preacher killed by a US airstrike earlier this year. It has been viewed more than 15,000 times.

A comment posted on the website by an anonymous user states: “Thanks for the info. i was looking for MAC site which was banned and now u told me its [sic] now United Ummah. thanks for the update!”

This is the ninth incarnation of Al-Muhajiroun, a group originally set up by Omar Bakri, a Syrian sheikh who is barred from Britain. Bakri’s followers have also operated under the names Al Ghurabaa, The Saved Sect and Islam4UK — all of which are banned.

The Home Office said: “Organisations that cause us concern, including those that might change their name to avoid the consequences of proscription, are kept under constant review.”

Some of this was quoted by Laban Tall in a Guardian comment thread to this article.

I checked the reference (to George Borrow's Wild Wales, written in 1854) and here is the full extract. It strangely prefigures some of the realities of our own time.

Once did I make the compass of the city [Chester] upon the walls, and was beginning to do the same a second time, when I stumbled against a black, who, with his arms leaning upon the wall, was spitting over it, in the direction of the river. I apologised, and contrived to enter into conversation with him. He was tolerably well dressed, had a hairy cap on his head, was about forty years of age, and brutishly ugly, his features scarcely resembling those of a human being. He told me he was a native of Antigua, a blacksmith by trade, and had been a slave. I asked him if he could speak any language besides English, and received for answer that besides English, he could speak Spanish and French. Forthwith I spoke to him in Spanish, but he did not understand me. I then asked him to speak to me in Spanish, but he could not. “Surely you can tell me the word for water in Spanish,” said I; he, however, was not able. “How is it,” said I, “that, pretending to be acquainted with Spanish, you do not even know the word for water?” He said he could not tell, but supposed that he had forgotten the Spanish language, adding however, that he could speak French perfectly. I spoke to him in French — he did not understand me: I told him to speak to me in French, but he did not. I then asked him the word for bread in French, but he could not tell me. I made no observations on his ignorance, but inquired how he liked being a slave? He said not at all; that it was very bad to be a slave, as a slave was forced to work. I asked him if he did not work now that he was free? He said very seldom; that he did not like work, and that it did not agree with him. I asked how he came into England, and he said that wishing to see England, he had come over with a gentleman as his servant, but that as soon as he got there, he had left his master, as he did not like work. I asked him how he contrived to live in England without working? He said that any black might live in England without working; that all he had to do was to attend religious meetings, and speak against slavery and the Americans. I asked him if he had done so. He said he had, and that the religious people were very kind to him, and gave him money, and that a religious lady was going to marry him. I asked him if he knew anything about the Americans? He said he did, and that they were very bad people, who kept slaves and flogged them. “And quite right too,” said I, “if they are lazy rascals like yourself, who want to eat without working. What a pretty set of knaves or fools must they be, who encourage a fellow like you to speak against negro slavery, of the necessity for which you yourself are a living instance, and against a people of whom you know as much as of French or Spanish.” Then leaving the black, who made no other answer to what I said, than by spitting with considerable force in the direction of the river, I continued making my second compass of the city upon the wall.

Almost half of young Viennese (43.6%) think that "there are already too many Turks living in this country". For 18.2% "As before, Jews have too much influence on the world economy". And more than 1 out of every 10 (11.2%) agrees with the statement that Adolf Hitler also did a lot of good things for people. These are the results of the "Youth and Zeitgeist" study by the Instituts für Jugendkulturforschung [Institute for Research into Youth Culture], which was presented on Wednesday. The study questioned 400 Viennese between the ages of 16 and 19 across all social classes. 40.5% of those questioned believe that the statement "for many immigrants real Austrians are an inferior people" is correct.

Of course the multicultists are now talking about the results of this study as if the ones who thought there were too many Turks and the ones who thought Jews had too much influence were the same people and that the problem therefore was a generic tolerance failure. It's more likely that the ones who thought Hitler had done some good things and thought Jews had too much influence were Turks.

In fact, this wilful confusion of antisemitism and Islamorealism is one of the standard deception techniques that the Establishment has developed. Of course the two tend to go together in opinion polls covering any society being colonised by Muslims. The Muslims express antipathy to Jews themselves and generate antipathy to Muslims in others. But when the multicult dreamers get the poll results they jump with delight and cry "Oh look, the far right has stirred up hatred of Muslims and Jews!"

Some extracts from the recently released Transatlantic Trend survey of public opinion on immigration.

There was high disapproval of government management of immigration, with 68% of Europeans and 73% of Americans believing that their governments are doing a poor or very poor job. The most discontented were the Italian respondents, 83% of whom believed their government is doing a poor or very poor job managing immigration. This was an increase from 70% in 2010.

In 2011, 52% of Europeans and 53% of Americans polled saw immigration as more of a problem than an opportunity, with the strongest pessimism in the United Kingdom (68%)

Compared to other countries, respondents in the United States and United Kingdom were the most worried about stress on public services, with 63% of respondents agreeing that immigrants place a burden on social services.

Publics on both sides of the Atlantic were optimistic about the success of immigrant integration (52% of Europeans and 56% of Americans), and even more positive about the integration of the “second generation” or children of immigrants. Sixty-five percent of Europeans and 74% of Americans considered the children of immigrants to be well or very well integrated. Many Europeans still viewed Muslim immigrants as less well integrated than immigrants in general, though members of the second generation were seen as better integrated than their parents. Spanish respondents were the most concerned, with 64% deeming Muslim immigrants to be poorly or very poorly integrated, compared to a 53% European average.

This is naive. All the evidence shows that every new generation of Muslims is more extreme than the one before it.

There are many other signs of lingeringly naive attitudes about immigration, although you can't rule out trick questions having been asked to get these results.

Support for a European Union responsibility to set national-level immigration numbers increased to 42% this year, though the Southern European countries still show far greater interest than other parts of Europe.

Europeans in general were very open to helping countries in North Africa and the Middle East experiencing the turmoil and aftermath of the Arab Spring with either trade (84% in favor) or development aid (79% in favor), though they were wary of opening their labor markets to migrants from the region (47% in favor) and would prefer that migrants who were admitted stay only temporarily.

It's amazing that anyone still believes believes the guest worker "they'll go home after a few years" line.

Majorities in all countries were worried about illegal immigration, with a European average of 67% and concern highest in Italy (80%) and Spain (74%). Worry about legal immigration, however, was low, with only 26% of European respondents expressing worry, and lowest in the United States where only 18% of respondents expressed worry.

This is ludicrous. Legal immigration is more of a threat than illegal immigration.

The public was sympathetic to the plight of migrants forced to flee their homes for a number of reasons: to avoid persecution, armed conflict, and natural disaster. Fewer but still a majority of respondents were also in favor of accepting migrants seeking to avoid poverty. Respondents in Spain (76%), Italy (68%), and the United States (64%) were the most supportive of those fleeing poor economic conditions, compared to a European average of 58%.

In fact, across the five European states majorities of citizens consider immigration to be more of a problem than opportunity, and view immigrants as a burden on social services. This suggests that despite significant efforts by western governments to make the case for rising diversity, large numbers of voters remain unconvinced. This is especially true in the UK, where over two-thirds of respondents labelled immigration problematic. In fact, public concern and scepticism about this issue was strongest in the UK. Interestingly, the British are significantly more anxious over this issue than voters in countries that have far more successful anti-immigrant populist parties.

Meanwhile, the propaganda continues.

In view of an ageing of European society, first of all it must be seen that we are going to need immigrant workers from these countries. It would be a good thing. Immigration has to be seen as positive.

We are all affected by this phenomenon. Every morning, I commute across the south of Tel Aviv and I see groups of Sudanese waiting on the streets for a prospective employer to pick them up for a little day labour. In the evening, when I head back home, I see the same people, but instead of waiting for work, they’re drinking, fighting among themselves or taking drugs. The problem continues to grow. There are more and more of them on the streets, and the police don’t do anything because there’s a lack of political direction.

An Israeli knows how to accept all kinds of people – it’s the national sport here. With that said, Israel can’t welcome every unhappy African. There’s not enough financial support or social programmes. For example, even though I have five children, I only receive a financial support to the tune of 980 shekels (196 euros) per month. You’re no longer eligible to receive unemployment benefits if you’re without a job for more than three months, and pensions are miniscule. Israel isn’t France. We don’t have the financial means to deal with this growing wave of immigrants. I think that certain measures are needed to put an end to this immigration problem. Our democracy will find a solution that’s fair for everyone”.

TOULOUSE, France—As protesters massed outside, the spokeswoman for a movement representing immigrants from France's former colonies went on trial Wednesday for allegedly insulting white French in what may be the first anti-white racism case in France.

The verdict, expected Jan. 25, may turn on a hyphen.

The trial grew out of a legal complaint from a far-right group, the General Alliance Against Racism and Respect for French and Christian Identity, Agrif, against Houria Bouteldja for using a word she invented to refer to white French that she claims was misconstrued. She was charged with "racial injury" and, if convicted, risks up to six months in prison and a maximum euro25,000 ($32,500) fine, though courts usually issue far lighter sentences.

Bouteldja, of the movement Indigenes of the Republic, called native white French "souchiens" in a TV interview. The word derives from "souche," or stock, as native white French are commonly called, but could sound like a hyphenated word meaning "lower than a dog."

Bouteldja's remarks on France-3 television station four years ago caused a clamor in large part because they cut straight to long-simmering issues over inequity between white French and French whose origins are in former North African and African colonies -- some of whose families took up arms to help France fight during the world wars.

Her Indigenes movement, now a tiny political party, tries to fight racism and promote equal rights for people with roots in "post-colonial immigration."

The TV interview and media stories that ensued put Bouteldja's remarks on center-stage. Brice Hortefeux, serving at the time as immigration and national identity minister, said he was "injured" and "shocked" by what sounded like an insulting play on words but took no action.

Security at the twice-postponed trial was high as about 150 protesters gathered outside, some representing the Indigenes movement and others from several extreme-right groups such as Bloc Identitaire (Identity Bloc), fighting what they claim is the Islamization of France and Europe by Muslim immigrants. Riot police kept the two sides apart.

Prosecutor Patrice Michel stressed the ambiguity of the word used by Bouteldja in the TV interview, but also said that her use of the word appeared aimed at "purposely hurting and outraging a certain category of French." He added, however, that doubt persists and that his interpretation did not constitute proof.

There was no doubt for Bernard Antony, president of Agrif and formerly a European lawmaker for the far-right National Front party. He denounced before the court what he claimed is the "racist folly" of Bouteldja and "an anti-white racism that exists and is growing."

"I'm thinking of my 14 grandchildren," he said.

Bouteldja claims she never meant to refer to native white French as being "lower than a dog." She told the court that she spoke of "souchiens" "to criticize the French expression 'French of stock,' which prevents me from feeling fully French."

In an interview ahead of the trial, she said the French expression "allows one to believe there are two categories of French, those of stock and the others, which creates two-speed citizens."

Defense lawyer Henri Braun, asking the court to acquit his client, said Bouteldja was really denouncing "the rise in hate and racism and tensions over the mythical French identity which propagates the idea that there are real French," and other French who are not real.

"They want you (the court) to judge that French of stock exist and strengthen the legitimacy of this ridiculous notion," he said.

The new "enlightened" Egyptian government can't even keep politics and religion separate internationally, never mind within its own country.

Egypt’s foreign ministry Wednesday summoned Dutch Ambassador Susan Blankhart to protest against what it perceives to be a defamation of Islam by parliament member Geert Wilders.

According to Dutch reports, Wilders is set to release a book in April next year to “examine the true nature of Islam.”

The right-wing politician is no stranger to controversy, having released numerous statements that were deemed defamatory to Islam by the Arab and Muslim world.

His statements include accusing Islam of being violent by nature and saying that the Quran should be banned.

According to Egyptian diplomatic sources, the foreign ministry insisted it could not tolerate “such unacceptable acts that could affect the spirit of cooperation, which should prevail between countries.”

In June, a Dutch court cleared Wilders of inciting hatred and discrimination against Muslims.

Egyptian authorities have recently banned him from entering the country during a visit of a European Parliament delegation.

As usual, the press are shamefully silent on the question of whether he was a Muslim.

The fact that he chose to attack a Christmas market makes it overwhelmingly likely. There is a standard pattern of Muslim attacks being carried out in times that have special significance to the Muslims' victims: Christmas especially, but also Easter, New Year and Bastille Day in France. I described this before as the ritual of Muslim violence. No doubt there will be more Muslim attacks over the Christmas and New Year period.

Nordine Amrani's weapons

A Facebook page was actually set up to pay tribute to Nordine Amrani but it has now been taken down. It's not clear whether this was genuine or perhaps an ironic commentary on the tributes paid to Jordy the would-be armed robber who was shot and killed by a shop-owner he was trying to rob in Liège recently.

Interesting eye-witness comment being reported in the Dutch-language press:

"I was on my way to the bus stop to go home. Suddenly, I saw a strange man behind me with a beard and a "hat" like Bin Laden," expains Margaux.

It should be noted though that the name of this firm of lawyers is Mes De Quévy et Amrani. In other words, the lawyer has the same name as the perp, although it seems they are not related. Still, the lawyer may be a Muslim himself, lying to protect the reputation of Islam.

The Belgian press says he became an orphan while very young and lived with one foster family after another so it may be that he did escape the Islamic brainwashing a child born to Muslim parents could normally expect.

Even if he is not a Muslim, he is an alien. Our empathy responses are partly governed by evolutionary mechanisms designed to favour those who are genetically like us. When these basic kinship bonds are missing (and organic nations are, in essence, extended kinship networks) it is much easier for a deep sense of alienation to develop. This can manifest itself in things like gang rape, rioting or killing sprees like this one.

Florence street vendors shot dead by lone gunman

Gianluca Casseri, 50, caused panic when he opened fire on a group of Senegalese street traders at a market in Piazza Dalmazia, on the northern outskirts of the city, killing two men and seriously wounding another.

He then jumped into a white car and drove off. Witnesses said the owner of a newspaper stall tried to block him but the gunman told him that unless he got out of the way he would be the next victim.

Casseri appeared a short time later at San Lorenzo market, in the centre of Florence, where he opened fire again with a large .357 Magnum hand gun, wounding two more Senegalese hawkers.

As dozens of armed police officers closed in, he then drove into an underground car park and turned the gun on himself, shooting himself in the mouth as he sat in his Volkswagen Polo.

Police said Casseri, from the town of Pistoia in Tuscany, had links to a far-Right, anti-immigration movement called Casa Pound.

Founded in Rome in 2003, it has around 5,000 members across Italyand draws its inspiration from the fascist regime of Benito Mussolini.

Casseri was described by associates as a withdrawn, solitary figure who worked as an editor on a magazine specialising in fantasy and horror stories.

“I heard the shots but I thought they were fireworks. Then I turned around and I saw three men on the ground surrounded by blood,” said a vendor at the scene of the first shooting.

Florence and other large Italian cities host a shifting population of African street vendors who sell traditional handicrafts and fake designer handbags to tourists.

After the shootings, a group of around 200 Senegalese traders staged a demonstration, shouting “Racists!” and “Shame, shame”.

The mayor of Florence, Matteo Renzi, expressed solidarity with the immigrant community and said the city had been “shaken by the lone act of a crazed and pitiless killer.”

The three wounded men were being treated for chest and abdominal wounds in Florence’s Santa Maria Nuova hospital.

The cowards at the Telegraph disabled comments after a surge of people posted their support for this man.

Yet they report that the Muhammedon who attacked Liege was not a terrorist, and barely report he was a muslim. Only if one is familiar with muslim names would one know.

Belgium grenade attack kills two

The attack took place around noon on Saint-Lambert square, home to the town's courthouse and located near a busy Christmas market, Belga news agency said.

One of two or more assailants threw stun grenades into the courthouse while another was hurled at a bus shelter, RTL-TV1 said.

Shots were fired across the square by gunmen posted on the rooftop of a bakery shop, with further shots heard later from across town.

Police cordoned off the square and gave chase to the assailants, one of whom was reportedly killed.

The Karachi Post in Pakistan claimed that the attack was linked to a sentence in an honour killing case. It said the parents of Sadia Sheikh were sentenced on Monday when there had been a bomb alert in the court.

Gaspard Grosjean, a journalist for La Meuse Liege on the scene, told The Daily Telegraph there was panic and confusion on the streets of Liege.

"There is at least one dead and the attacker. Police are looking for another shooter. There are lots of ambulances and many casualties - at least 10 people.

"At the moment you can't move in the city centre. People are crying and in shock - they do not know what is going on. Everyone has been told to stay inside and are hiding in shops."

Police were not immediately contactable to confirm the toll or events.

The attack comes a day after a Belgian court sentenced four members of a Pakistani family to prison for the murder of their law student daughter and sister in the country's first "honour killing" trial.

After pronouncing the family members guilty for the shooting death of 20-year-old Sadia Sheikh in October 2007, the jury sentenced father Tarik Mahmood Sheikh to 25 years behind bars, mother Zahida Parveen Sariya to 20 years, brother Mudusar to 15 and sister Sariya to five years, media reported.

Lawyers for the family said brother Mudusar, who confessed to pulling the trigger on the three bullets that killed his sister, was handed a lesser jail term than his parents as they were considered to have ordered the girl's death.

Of course, it was a tiny minority of extremists, the vast majority of muslims are peaceful, there is no sanction for honour killings in islam (despite 91% of honour crimes worldwide being committed by muslims) and if you question any of this you're a racist, islamophobic bigot who should die of cancer.

A teenager murdered after she brought “shame” on the British Pakistani family of a young man with whom she was having sex had been groomed from the age of 12 to be used for sex by adults, The Times reveals today.

Laura Wilson, 17, was stabbed and thrown into a canal in October 2010, five years after child protection workers first identified her as being at high risk of being sexually exploited. Since 2005, care staff had compiled a large file on her case. Links were identified between Laura, other young girls and a number of British Pakistani men in her home town of Rotherham, South Yorkshire.

Workers at a child sexual exploitation project sent a report to Rotherham social services but no action was taken to remove her from what became an continuing cycle of sexual abuse.

There is a French charity called Solidarité Kosovo that offers support to the isolated Serbs still living in Kosovo. It brings them furniture, household articles, educational materials and medical and sporting equipment. At Christmas it organises a special convoy with warm clothes and presents for the children. You can donate to it via PayPal from its website here. The PayPal link on their English page doesn't work. You can just click the link on the top left of the French page. It will be in French but if you're familiar with the PayPal interface it shouldn't be a problem.

One of France's most well-known singers and actresses, Marie Laforêt, will today appear in a Paris courtroom to defend herself against charges that a job advertisement she placed discriminated against Muslims.

72-year-old Laforêt, who first found fame as an actress in the 1960s, placed an ad on an internet site looking for someone to carry out some work on her terrace in 2009, reported daily newspaper Le Parisien on Thursday.

She specified in the ad that "people with allergies or orthodox Muslims" should not apply "due to a small chihuahua."

Laforêt claimed that she made the stipulation because she believed the Muslim faith saw dogs as unclean.

The case was taken up by anti-discrimination organization Mrap, which lodged a complaint against the internet site which ran the ad.

"To think that Marie Laforêt is racist is just stupid," said her lawyer, David Koubbi, according to the newspaper. He said the words in the advertisement were only a "warning."

Koubbi added that the star "has always shown her interest and admiration for the Muslim faith."

"She knew that the presence of a religion could conflict with the religious convictions of orthodox Muslims. It was a sign of respect."

Experts in the Muslim faith were quoted as rejecting the defence.

"Dogs are not considered unclean and it's false to suggest otherwise," said one quoted by the newspaper.

Muslims in the Catalan city of Salt (see this video about Salt if you haven't already seen it) plan to hold a Miss Islam Catalonia event there next year. In contrast to western beauty contests, it is intended to showcase supposed female virtues other than physical attractiveness. These are: religious sentiments, attachment to tradition, love of family and chasteness.

Contestants are expected to display: chasteness, the ability to speak well about themselves and their locality, good cooking skills, talents in poetry recital and, above all, knowledge of the Koran.

Participants must be "educated and cultivated" Muslim women between the ages of 18 and 25. Prizes will be awarded in four categories:

A Sweden Democrat politician in southern Sweden recently made the papers after saying on Facebook that the word “negro” is not a racist term.

“No, for me a negro is a negro. There is nothing negative with that at all,” Annika Rydh of Älmhult, Småland, told local paper Smålandsposten on Monday.

The debate kicked off after Rydh answered the query “Is it racist to say negro?” in a Facebook post. To her, the answer is no.

According to the paper there have been many reports to the Swedish Equality Ombudsman (Diskrimineringsombudsmannen, DO) pertaining to the word and several companies and government agencies have been made to pay damages to people who feel discriminated against when that particular word has been used.

But Rydh told the paper that it is not the word but how it is used that is important.

“It shouldn't be an insult to be called a negro. There is the red race, the yellow race, and then there's me, who is of the white race. A negro is a negro. There is nothing demeaning with that,” Rydh told Smålandsposten.

Rydh also told the paper that things have gone too far and that if it continues in this fashion it will soon be impossible to say anything at all.

“We do have freedom of speech in this country, after all,” Rydh told Smålandsposten.

According to Rydh, despite the fact that some may feel the word is demeaning most of the people she knows wouldn't mind at all. But these are no people of colour, the paper pointed out.

“No, I don't know many negroes, there aren't that many in our area,” Rydh told the paper.

She retained the firm belief that it is the context that should determine when it is acceptable to use the term, and if someone feels insulted they should just say so.

Annika Rydh is one of two Sweden Democrats on the municipal council in Älmhult.

There is actually no realistic alternative to the use of the word negro. The multicultists have started using the word "black" to apply to anyone not of European ancestry. The head of the Black Police Association, for example, was an Iranian - until he was indicted and sent to prison.

Here is what the British Sociological Association has to say about the word 'Black' in its guide to the use of language:

Black

Black is a term that embraces people who experience structural and institutional discrimination because of their skin colour and is often used politically to refer to people of African, Caribbean and South Asian origin to imply solidarity against racism.

The term originally took on political connotations with the rise of black activism in the USA in the 1960s when it was reclaimed as a source of pride and identity in opposition to the many negative connotations relating to the word "black" in the English language (black leg, black list etc.). In the UK however, there is an on-going debate about the use of this term to define South Asian peoples because of the existence of diverse South Asian cultural identities. In the USA, the term 'people of colour' is increasingly used instead of, or alongside black.

Some South Asian groups in Britain object to the use of the word "black" being applied to them. Some sociologists argue that it also conflates a number of ethnic groups that should be regarded separately - Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Indians and so on.

Whilst there are many differences between and within each of the groups, the inclusive term black refers to those who have a shared history of European colonialism, neo-colonialism, imperialism, ethnocentrism and racism. One solution to this is to refer to "black peoples", "black communities" etc., in the plural to imply that there are a variety of such groups.

Think carefully about the words you use. Words which were once in common usage are now considered offensive, e.g. half-caste and coloured. Use mixed-race and black instead. Black can cover people of Arab, Asian, Chinese and African origin.

If you want to indicate people of recent African ancestry, therefore, the term "black" is not adequate. "Negro" is the most obvious choice.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the word negro, although I have seen comments deleted on newspaper comment sites simply for using it. In 1964 Martin Luther King said this:

I think we may be able to get a Negro president in less than 40 years. I would think that this could come in 25 years or less."

Britain First has emailed over 70,000 British nationalists and organised a rally outside HMP Bronzefield (to take place this Friday at 12 midday) to show the government just how sick ordinary Brits are of the ‘race card’ being played against the native British people.

Britain First has also set up a Facebook support group and has drawn in many different patriotic groups to coordinate a ‘fight back’ campaign.

Kelly Hollingsworth, the woman who took the infamous video - and is now reveling in her notoriety - will also be confronted in a series of ‘fight back’ actions by Britain First.

“We call upon all British patriots, nationalists and all utterly fed-up Brits to assemble at noon on Friday to show their support,” said Britain First Chairman Paul Golding.

“We also call upon the Home Secretary, Teresa May, and the prison governors, Helga Swidenbank and Alan Thurlby, to be held personally accountable for any harm Miss West may suffer as a result of her incarceration in an ethnically-dominated prison.”

An email/online campaign was launched today (Wednesday 30th November) and further direct action events will be announced later in the week.

The political class and the media may silence one lone English mum but they will not silence Britain First or the rest of the nationalist community.END

INVITATION TO ALL CONCERNED PATRIOTS

We call upon all true patriots to rally outside HMP Bronzefield, Woodthorpe Road, Ashford, Middlesex, TW15 3JZ on Friday 2nd of December at 12 midday in support of Miss Emma West.

Miss West has been victimized by the political elite and the PC multi-cult traitors who have brought this country and our people to their knees.

It is time for every true British patriot to take a stand and demand justice!

This young English woman – who was pushed over the edge on a multicultural tram - has been remanded in jail on the pretence of ‘protecting her’ due to several threats against her life.

Compare this with the treatment of the Islamic fanatics who were bailed after being charged with public order offences that occurred during their despicable homecoming demos against our troops.

Many of these traitors and jihadists were given around the clock police protection due to them receiving ‘death threats’ - nothing demonstrates the tangible anti-British/white/Christian bias spewing forth from the corrupt political elite traitors who would see this country and its people ground into the dirt.

It’s time to leave party affiliations, egos and petty differences aside and stand shoulder to shoulder.

If we fail to do so in such an obvious and justified cause then how can we ever hope to rally our people into action in the future.

People will follow when led…its time my friends to lead our people from the front.

Like Emma, we have had enough and we call on all and every nationalist - men and woman alike - to join us outside the prison to show this victimized lady our support and to cry with one voice: WE WANT OUR COUNTRY BACK…NOW!

Friday, 2nd of December 2011HMP Bronzefield, Middlesex, TW15 3JZ12 mid-day - WILL YOU BE THERE?

This is from earlier in the year. It seems that a hitherto unacknowledged protest movement has been underway for some time, consisting of European women outraged at what is being done to their countries and not afraid to say so.

I can't make out everything she says but it includes:

"Spain for the Spanish... the blacks to Africa, the Chinese to China."

Towards the end of the film, a negro goes over and assaults the woman physically.

We need a cool acronym to give a name to this resistance movement. Some suggestions below.

WRATH - Women Raging At The HajjisWRATHFUL - Women Raging At Their Horribly Fucked Up Lands

The hacker claims to have access to all the website's data, including email and IP addresses of everyone who has ever posted a comment there. He laughs that people are stupid enough to post with their real email addresses, including work email addresses, some he claims come from government websites.

On the 1389 blog not long ago, in relation to Wordpress taking action against BareNakedIslam in response to a complaint from CAIR, the point was made that users of Wordpress and Blogger were much more vulnerable to legal manoeuvres designed to suppress free speech. Even if that's true, they are much less vulnerable to website hacking. Because then it's not just some Mickey Mouse hosting company the hacker has to go up against, but big companies like Google with elaborate security systems.

Can't resist some more Enoch Powell quotes. The prescience almost makes you weep.

Indians and others protested last night that a speech by Mr Enoch Powell yesterday to Southall Chamber of Commerce was dangerously inflammatory and damaging to race relations in an area that contains one of the highest concentrations of Indians in the country. Mr Powell said that Asians posed more of a threat to Britain than Black Power. "Our towns and Cities are being taken over and transformed not by the Caribbean but by Asia," he said. "It is by Black Power that the headlines are caught, and under the shape of the Negro that the consequences for Britain of immigration and what is miscalled 'race' are popularly depicted. "Yet it is more truly when he looks into the eyes of Asia that the Englishman comes face to face with those who will dispute with him the possession of his native land."

...Referring to the example of Detroit, Mr Powell quoted a British planner's writing in a professional journal, who found in particular "the polarization of attitudes and locations, fear, lack of contact between various income groups, diminishing contact between black and white populations, go hand in hand with changing locations". Mr Powell prophesied: "The name of that city a generation ahead could be Bradford or Birmingham or London. Yet it need not be. The power of decision is still in our hands, and that power is a power over numbers; but it is a power which grows weaker as each year goes by and which once lost is never to be had again."

Wouldn't it be great if this was the start of a resistance movement? It could go down in history like the Suffragettes. We need a cool, catchy name for it. I wonder if the Guardian will get "on board" with it as a vibrant example of real-world feminism. Probably not.

Reading through old newspaper archives, it becomes obvious that it was in the 70s that the sky fell in: that it became virtually impossible to talk about the unfolding genocide as the mechanisms of dissent suppression gradually became institutionalised. The Age of Unreason began.

There was, of course, one exception, one far-sighted man amongst the many:

A public policy of repatriating immigrants from Britain Would cost £200m a year over five years, Mr Enoch Powell, United Ulster Unionist Coalition MP for Down, South, said last night.

He told Surrey Branch of the Conservative Monday Club at Croydon any imaginable expenditure would be a cheap option to the gravity of the alternative. He said: The magnitudes involved are far from astronomic: one million at £1,000 per head, I have scaled up my 1969 hypothesis of £2,000 per family, represents over five years no more than £200m a year; and you could double that figure without producing more than a ripple on the surface of recent budgets.

Not only in financial terms but in the much more significant terms of human skills, experience and qualifications, the outlay would represent "development aid" of a size and effectiveness which current expenditures on aid could not match; and in both human and material terms the future savings would be incalculable.

They take upon themselves a fearful responsibility who scoff at policies of repatriation and insist that the people of this country, all of them, must accept the inevitability of the prospect which the inadvertence or timidity of a few years have created. All round, people are calling for "a stop to immigration"; and parties and politicians are pledging themselves' to formulae which they hope will be mistaken for the equivalent of that.

Whether they all fully realize it or not, the whole thing is an irrelevance and a deception. Twenty years ago, when the Government shelved for the second time a measure to distinguish between British subjects belonging and not belonging to the United Kingdom," stopping immigration "still had a practical meaning, and would in fact have averted all that has followed and is to come. But as long as 10 years ago, "stopping immigration" has already become largely meaningless as a policy prescription.

With each year that has passed, the foreseeable future of our urban areas has depended less and less upon the net annual addition from outside and more and more upon the consequences of the size, distribution and age-structure of the already resident coloured population. Those who, like Lord Brooke of Hampstead, were talking in the middle 1960s about cities one-third coloured were not dolng so because they assumed or even dreamt that in the early 70s the net annual intake would be nearer 100,000 a year than 50,000. The prospect rested already upon what existed then.

Yet even this is not the principal reason for what I have called the irrelevance of "stopping immigration". The principal reason is that, once given, a massive alien population accepted as permanently resident, especially if that population is predominantly Asian, immigration has become a consequence and not a cause in its own right. If a person is accepted as permanently resident, it is impracticable to refuse admission to his wife and children or, within a reasonable interpretaton, to his closely related and genuine dependants.

What is more, it is impossible to deny him the right to marry whom he will, here or overseas, and to Introduce that spouse into this country to reside with him. Where a resident population has a strongly rooted propensity, even from generation to generation, to marry among its own kind, it follows that there can in real life be no limit upon future immigration; and the larger and therefore the more self-conscious and closely-knit is that resident population, the more certain and the more extensive will that unlimited future immigration be.

A resident Asian and African population rising from two to three to four millions in the course of the next two decades also means continuing Asian and African immigration to which no limit can be placed and which must in turn accelerate the growth of the total. The question upon which the future of this country hangs is not, as so many fondly suppose, whether immigration is to be "stopped" or not. It is whether we shall or can continue to accept a resident African and Asian population of the present or prospective size as a fait accompli, as a permanent and irreversible fact.

In posing this question, we turn from confronting the escapism of levity to confront the escapism of despair: for Instantly comes the reaction from high. and low, from every point of the compass: "What is done cannot be undone; we must accept and suffer the consequences of this fact, whatever they are going to be". What is certain is that whatever the consequences may he, they cannot be bought off by public expenditure and environmental or economic contrivances.

The idea that this is possible is an extension of the cruel and hoary fallacy that crime and violence are caused by what is nowadays fashionably called "deprivation", and that they can therefore be, reduced or prevented by raising the standards of housing, of education, of amusement and of affluence generally. The catastrophe of widespread violence, entrenched in a divided community, can be averted only in the way that other apprehended catastrophes can be averted: namely, by removing its root cause. That root cause is the existing magnitude of the Asian and African population and the certainty of the continuing future increase in that population, proportionately to the rest, which Is inherent in its present magnitude and composition.

It follows that there is no escape except by way of such a reduction of that existing population as will be sufficient at least to remove the prospect of future growth: in other words to limit to its present dimensions the "alien wedge" (I use a famous judicial phrase) in the cities and urban areas of England. Between 1965 and 1970 "assistance to all who wish to return home" was part of the official policy of the Conservative Party in Opposition. But though much emphasis was laid upon it before the general election of 1970, no attempt was made to implement it.

On the contrary, measures were taken actively to discourage even those below the supplementary benefit level from persisting in applying for repatriation. Since then it has become conventional practice thoughtlessly to repeat, as if it were self-evident, that repatriation is impracticable. Repatriation, and repatriation on the major scale which is necessary, is not impracticable. The only rational alternative to disaster can never be dismissed as impracticable.

The Asian and West Indian immigrants into this country and their children born here are in the overwhelming majority citizens of their countries of origin, acknowledging and professing themselves to be so and recognized and represented as such by the diplomatic and consular representatives of their respective nations.

The public recognition by authority that it is in the supreme interest of all that the current immigration and its consequences should be decisively reversed would produce results of which no conception can be formed as long as all conspire to treat the proposition as unreal and unmentionable.

If repatriation is public policy, then the natural claim of any family to be united can be met by assistance for those in Britain to rejoin their families in their countries of origin: the, present obligation to admit dependants is replaced by an obligation to facilitate the reunification of families in their own country.

If repatriation is public policy, the obligation to provide maintenance from public funds to those unemployed or disabled or destitute in Britain is replaced by an obligation to provide for their resettlement in their homelands.

If repatriation is public policy, there is no reason why tax relief should be given for dependants, real or fictitious, who are overseas.

At present every pressure, every inducement, every assumption is directed towards the permanence of New Commonwealth immigration. The situation would be transformed if the underlying presumption of public policy were reversed.